Of course they will. Nikon DID lose customers who went from the D700 to a 5DIII. You and I, as individuals, don't matter per se. What matters is aggregate behavior over time. The available data for the past 6 years have shown that in aggregate, Nikon has been losing dSLR market share, and Canon has been gaining it. Maybe that will change, maybe not. Given that as of the most recently available data (2010), Nikon trailed Canon by close to 15% of market share (45% vs. 30%) Nikon has a long uphill climb.

with all the complains about canons 6D autofocus why is no website, that cares about canon in one way or the other, writing an open letter to canon... demanding a statement?

i mean.... dpreview wrote it´s a rather dissapointing camera and i have yet to read a preview that is not puzzled by the low-tech AF.

if we complain here in a forum .. canon cares a sh*t.

but if a popular and frequented website writes something and is not afraid to tell the truth... maybe canon will take notice and feel obligated to react?

or maybe it´s to late here and im just bored and tired.....

The 6D is supposed to excel at low-light autofocus. If you don't need that, then it probably wasn't built for you but rather for users who need that. If you have different needs for AF, Canon offers the 5D3 and 1DX. If none of those meet your needs, there are Nikon and Sony and others. Why complain that Canon isn't making the exact camera you want at the price you want at the time that you want it? No manufacturer can satisfy everyone. If Canon builds the exact camera that you want, then other potential buyers can rightfully "demand a statement" as to why Canon didn't build the camera that they wanted at the price that they wanted at the time that they wanted it. There would be no end to such statements. Besides, who has tested the 6D's AF and found it lacking? People are complaining before they can even try the camera.

You can't be serious?!"Excel at Low Light performance"?You actually believe that marketing bull***t?Have you read what else Canon has to say about the 6D on their website?They actually say stuff like, "with continuous shooting up to 4.5fps, you are ready to capture fast action".That line was actually taken from their description:http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_6dUnless "fast action" is a Seniors' Walk-a-Thon, the 6D is not ready to capture jack.

My point is the talk about "excelling at Low Light performance" is most likely equally fabricated marketing hype.

And as far as the guy complaining about it, he is well within his right to do so if he is to plunck down his money for one. It always amazes me how people run to Canon's (or any other major company's) rescue when others complain about their subpar efforts. The guy has every right to complain about the 6D because in this day and age, it is a crap effort from a company that should know better. And as long as people just sit their and say nothing, Canon will continue to put out subpar equipment at overflated prices backed overhyped marketing. Every Canon camera put out this year was good but could have been a hell of a lot better for what they are charging. But the 6D is just plain crap. Period.

Wow ... what an ultra-cynical point of view! You haven't even tried the camera and you're calling it "crap" and worse. Canon has released an ultra-low-light autofocus spec for the 6D and there is no reason to disbelieve it. Why would you disbelieve it -- other than having an ultra-cynical point of view?

And why don't you wait to try it before slamming the camera and the company that makes it? Oh yes, ... that would require just an ounce of fairness, which you can't seem to muster.

Of course, the 6D isn't going to please everybody. No camera can. If multi-cross-type autofocus is someone's priority, Canon offers it! You just have to pay for it. They're not obligated to put every feature they make in every camera they make.

Why do people feel entitled to the exact camera that they personally envision at the price that they want to pay? The fact that a camera does not meet your personal photographic needs at this moment does not mean it is "sub-par". Can you just imagine that it might be very well designed to meet someone else's photographic priorities, perhaps someone with a different photographic style or different subject matter? And if another company offers you the camera you need, then by all means buy it!

Talk about cynical, I wasn't slamming the camera, I was slamming the false advertising of it. When a company writes ready for high speed capture when referring to 4.5fps it gives me good reason to believe the rest of what they say about it is equally misleading. Why don't you try not being such a fanboy and having a open mind that Canon screws over it's customers and people like you only make it worse because you defend them despite of it. You're not helping Canon or yourself.

It was about the fact that their website does not disclose any RRPs...

The best way of getting your message across to Canon is for them to see all of their 6Ds gathering dust on the shelf while the D600 sells like hotcakes.

Exactly. I hope the 6D is a huge flop so as to send a message to Canon to start innovating and stop putting out products for profit. Anyone with even the slightest amount of common sense should be able to see that this camera was just put out to encourage enthusiasts not to buy the D600. Things like GPS and Wireless transfer should have been included in the 5D Mark III at slightly above the price of the 6D. That would have shown real innovation and the damn things would have flown off the shelves faster than Canon could make them. The D800 nor the D600 wouldn't have stood a chance. Instead, we get a overpriced 5D Mark III and a crippled AF 6D.

I'm basically locked into the Canon system because of my lens collection, but when any of my friends just starting out ask what camera they should buy, I will recommend to them Nikon or Sony.

I think some people are just too cheap to admit that the camera they want is a bit more than they would like to spend.

And there's the rub. Do you bend over and help them stick it in or do you turn around and slap their face! Is it more than you would like to spend or is it more than it's really worth? And if it's more than it's worth, do you "...take up arms against a sea of troubles..."?

"...a bit more than they would like to spend" is pathetically passive. And "just too cheap" is what a whore says when she gets insulted when you only offer her a quarter.

Most consumers have become like this guy -- they think a seller sets the price and they can either afford it or not. If they have the money, they just hand it over for what they want. The idea that the price may not be worth the value never enters their mind. What -- I don't get what I want because it costs too much???

Best example is the 5D3. I'd own one today if I thought it was worth $3500. It has nothing to do with what I'd "like to spend." I could spend that, even though I don't want to, but it's far more important to me to say to Canon, "I like your product, but I won't pay that much for it." So I don't pay that much for it. [The Adorama ebay sale last weekend revealed that it can be sold for $2750, so when the opportunity comes along again, I'll pay that for what is probably the best overall, mass market, full frame camera available.] Frankly, all the bendovers, who gladly handed over $3500 haven't helped send any message to Canon in the only language they truly comprehend.

Funny thing, as much as I think the 6D is an abortion of a camera, the price does not seem out of line. It's going to put a lot of Spielberg wannabes and center-pointers in hog heaven. And it's going to sell a lot of glass for Canon.

And now, if you'll pardon me, I have pictures to make. Good day one and all, even you pathetically passive consumers.

Very well said. I totally agree with you. I was one the first people in Japan to get my hands on a 5D Mark III. I bought it from a Pro shop and they hugely discounted it for me because I have been a loyal customer for years. Otherwise I would have never considered the purchase. It's a fine camera, just NOT at the price that Canon is arrogantly asking.

DKN, you are diverting discussion from your original claim that Canon's claim the 6D has good low light AF is 'bull'. I can't see why you doubt it.

I'm not diverting anything. There are many discussions about this camera and I'm just commenting where I feel I have something to say. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, but I'm entitled to my opinion.

In reply to you, all I can say is that if you examine the rest of their marketing hype about the 6D, it only seems logical that its low light capabilities are equally exaggerated. Besides no machine ever manufactured performs up to the standards advertised by the company that manufactures it. None! I'm sorry to say, but to believe a Single cross point AF system will have great low light performance is just naive. I own both the 5D Mark III and the 1DX and use them both daily in various lighting conditions. Even with their outstanding AF and multiple cross type AF points, they sometimes struggle to lock focus in low light situations. Realistically, I can't imagine the 6D with it's single point fairing any better. Otherwise I would just sell both of those cameras and buy two 6Ds. Especially since (according to Canon) it's ready for high speed capture with it's 4.5fps continuous burst. Guess my 1DX is just huge overkill. lol

DKN, maybe it's because your high-end Canons have so many AF points that they struggle a bit in very low light.

The larger the elements of the AF system, the less low-light performance.

Actually I have both of my cameras set to only use the cross type AF points. Any camera will struggle when shooting events in dark night clubs etc... It's just a given. My point is that my present cameras represent Canon's best AF ever and even they struggle (as expected) in extremely low light, so it is reasonable to think the 6D will not do any better with a lesser AF. Sorry I'm just extremely skeptical of the low light performance claims of this camera, especially since I live in low light territory for a large majority of my shooting. Experience tells me it's hogwash. But hey I would love to be proven wrong. If so, maybe I'll pick up a couple of 6Ds.

Sitting Elf

The points brought up here in multiple posts are certainly valid, but Canon has other problems as well that have been harped on repeatedly over the last few years.

One of the biggest is that their software engineers STILL think that the overwhelmingly majority of their customers are on Windows. Virtually all of their software is written for Microsoft, and "maybe" ported to Mac OS's as an afterthought, or after thousands of customers DEMAND it.

Canon has to realize that Mac users make up a VERY LARGE percentage of creative arts professionals and amateurs. They just don't get it! An example is my 6350 large format photo printer... I have to keep one remaining Windows computer in order to take advantage of the cost-analysis function built into the printer. I am not the only owner of that printer that has BEGGED Canon to port the software to be functional on Mac OS... but no response from them. (The program's purpose is to measure pigment use and paper costs in order to accurately provide cost per print which is extremely important for large format when they can cost upwards of $20.00 to print!)

This is just Canon. Mostly great equipment, but piss-poor development beyond.

The points brought up here in multiple posts are certainly valid, but Canon has other problems as well that have been harped on repeatedly over the last few years.

One of the biggest is that their software engineers STILL think that the overwhelmingly majority of their customers are on Windows. Virtually all of their software is written for Microsoft, and "maybe" ported to Mac OS's as an afterthought, or after thousands of customers DEMAND it.

Canon has to realize that Mac users make up a VERY LARGE percentage of creative arts professionals and amateurs. They just don't get it! An example is my 6350 large format photo printer... I have to keep one remaining Windows computer in order to take advantage of the cost-analysis function built into the printer. I am not the only owner of that printer that has BEGGED Canon to port the software to be functional on Mac OS... but no response from them. (The program's purpose is to measure pigment use and paper costs in order to accurately provide cost per print which is extremely important for large format when they can cost upwards of $20.00 to print!)

This is just Canon. Mostly great equipment, but piss-poor development beyond.

Couldn't agree more.They just don't seem to care. The GUI of all of their software is just plain hideous! That's why as soon as Adobe or Apple upgrade their apps to support whatever new camera Canon has released, the first thing most professionals do is delete DPP from their computers. Personally I never install it. If RAW is not natively supported, I use Adobe's RAW to DNG converter as a workaround until Camera RAW or Aperture or Lightroom can catch up.

Maybe its just me but I get the feeling that Canon are specifically NOT targeting the "internet camera buff" market, serious amature or semi pro users very focused on IQ AND price.

There recent releases to me seem to be either focused on the larger pro markets(event photographers with the 5D3, sports/jurnos with the 1DX, looks like the 3D maybe a higher end studio cam aswell) or towards the more casual comsumer users.

We may turn our noses up at Wifi and GPS as gimmicks but for a high end family/travel camera they are probabley key sellers to alot of people. Likewise I'm guessing alot of such users arent going to be interested in learnign advanced AF systems, the best center point possible is likely enough.

Why would Canon not be going after the prosumers? my guess would be that theres simpley not much money to be made doing it, they hunger for the latest most expensive tech but generally are not willing to spend massive amounts. You look at Canon's profits and they do seem to be greater than there market share would suggest so my guess is that there making alot more on the 5D3 or the 6D than Nikon are on the D800 or D600.